Is Rachael Ray a Terrorist?
May 30th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Archive for May, 2008
Interview: Roseanne Sullivan
May 25th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Roseanne Sullivan blogs at Catholic Pundit Wannabe, which she explains as follows: “This blog’s title is related to an essay I wrote at the peak of the scandals about priests betraying the trust of those who they were supposed to serve. Then as now, the press always sought out for interviews dissident Catholics who seemed to be using the scandal as an opportunity to promote their own agendas. In reaction, I made an immodest proposal: Since I am a well-informed believer who loves the Church’s teachings, wouldn’t it make more sense for the press to interview me instead of, say, Andrew Sullivan or Frank McCourt?”
MW: What, if anything, does the term “Catholic art” mean to you?
RS: A Catholic is a member of the Roman Catholic Church, which is the body of Christ.
United with Christ through the sacraments, the Catholic writer or artist of any kind creates art for the greater glory of God. Humility is a requirement. Excellence should be also. God deserves only the best.
Modern art is created for the purpose of epater les bourgeois, shock the petty middle class. I believe Catholic art should be done with love. According to St. Paul, love is not proud; it does not seek its own ends. It rejoices in the truth. As Christ taught us, love serves. Love lays down its life for the other, and it doesn’t puff itself up.
The opposite attitude of how to be an artist was taught when I studied art in the 1970s. The essential advice was to express one’s self. The unstated ideal was to shock, discomfort, or annoy. For one example, one of my art teachers had a show at the Minneapolis Museum of Art, where to enter the room where her work was displayed, you had to go through a little constructed entryway that had a low altar and a small, low window above the altar that let you get a preview glimpse into the room. She told the class with relish that by making the window low, she was forcing the gallery goers to bow before her altar. Her art consisted of hundreds of plaster statues of a rearing horse, all identical, about 14 inches high. She cast them out of a mold she had picked up somewhere. It cannot be denied that this artist’s intention was to manipulate and offend and to leave the viewer wondering what the point was. Another professor’s installation was a series of chairs hung on a wall in a stairwell at the student center.
The culmination for me occurred when a world famous artist spoke at the school, and he told the audience that he had to be on his guard to make sure the art he made was not beautiful. His art at the time consisted of concrete rectangles that he poured at gallery installations, which ruined the beautiful wood gallery floors. He exulted in the bewilderment of the gallery goers as they viewed his pieces. He told us he took special care to ensure that the concrete did not assume any of the attractive swirling patterns that might form if it was left to pour naturally. For him, beauty was not only not the point. Beauty was absolutely to be avoided.
I am in a sense recovering from those years. I didn’t accept the nonsense I was taught, but I was discouraged and paralyzed by it for a long time.
Of course, if an artist attempts to do “Catholic” art, the danger is that the artist can fall into the nether world of the maudlin, the insincere, and the clichéd. I think that art done by a Catholic is Catholic art, if it is true art, because true art tells the truth.
True art is true to the demands of the art being practiced. As Pope John Paul II wrote, an artist responds to the demands of art and faithfully accepts art’s specific dictates. He spoke with great appreciation about the creativity of the artist, whose creativity mirrors within human limits the creativity of God.
The Catholic artist should not do anything to draw the viewer or reader’s or hearer’s attention to the artist’s own cleverness. All of the artist’s work should be in the service of the thing being conveyed, whether it be the topic of the painting or the written story or the scripture, in the case of liturgical music. That’s why Gregorian chant fascinates me. The vast body of chants was written anonymously, for the glory of God.
Famous Catholic writer Flannery O’Connor wrote that a writer has to tell stories that are about life and character. Any artistic work fails when it is created to get a point across. Every story has to have a meaning, she wrote, but the meaning is perceived as part of the story not something extrinsic to it. The same is true for a painting or a music composition. The meaning must be intrinsic to the composition.
Art that is created to be in a Church and that is going to be viewed by people during the liturgy probably has to be more explicit in its meaning than art created for other venues. Art in the Church exists to draw the worshiper’s mind and heart to God.
MW: You have said that you are a “Catholic writer and artist.” To what extent does your Catholic identity inform your work?
RS: My Catholic identity makes me want to use my talents to show the truth and the beauty of God.
RIP Will Elder, the Guardian vs. Edward Said
May 24th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Interview: Brandon G. Withrow
May 24th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Brandon G. Withrow is a Ph.D. and adjunct professor at Winebrenner Theological Seminary where he teaches the history of Christianity. See his blog here.
MW: How much does current scholarship on Christianity address Christian art? How well are religion programs in this country covering religious art in general?
BW: Any discussion of Christianity and the arts would have to vary from field to field and department to department. Each religious studies department emphasizes a different model or methodology, and examining artistic expression in Christianity is often limited by that model or methodology.
In my experience teaching the history of Christianity, Christian art is often (though not always) a tool for understanding the various dimensions of religious life—cultural, institutional, political, and personal—rather than for art appreciation, per se.
I do believe, however, that the field of religious studies is giving a greater appreciation to the importance of religious art in general than has been done in previous years. By way of example, the American Academy of Religion has their Arts Series, offers awards in the arts, and sponsors trips to local exhibits. Last year they held a discussion on video art and showed several important films, including Water, which looks at Hindu widows and the practice of sati.
In the religious studies departments at Christian colleges and universities, where the study of Christianity is often driven by a commitment to its beliefs, Christian art may have an added dimension and be more personal. In the fields of history or theology, art might not only tell the students about religion in all its dimensions, it may also give the student a connection to his or her heritage. In evangelical colleges and universities, examining art, such as film, often comes with a discussion of its images of reconciliation or redemption or its usefulness for ministry.
Where I think art discussion is often lacking is in Christian seminaries, ironically. While I can’t say this is true for all seminaries, it seems to me that the greater emphasis is in biblical studies and theology. This is what they do well. This doesn’t mean that it doesn’t come out in some form—schools like Westminster Theological Seminary offer courses on “Christianity and the Arts” and promote jazz concerts—but on the classroom level, it is often an elective.
As I teach courses on the history of Christianity, I am trying to integrate visual art. For example, this summer I am teaching a course on Medieval and Reformation Spiritualities. While it is a history course, I have chosen a text that incorporates art depicting the diversity of Christian spirituality.
MW: Do you think there is any such thing as Christian art per se? Why or why not?
BW: In the more evangelical circles of my childhood, art was preachy. You could tell it was “Christian” because it had a cross and a weeping Jesus who called out “come to me.” It often looked like something you could find at a van convention, but with the added benefit of having a verse typed across it. Christian art, as great of a history as it has, has been given a bad name by the dominance of this kitsch. Is this Christian art? If by Christian is meant, art done in the name of Christianity, then yes, it is Christian. But this does not make it good art.
All good art is worth pursuing. And as all persons are created in the image of God, I believe good art, as it reflects something of the creator, can be done by any artist, with or without Christian commitments. By reflecting the creator, however, I don’t mean that it must look like it belongs in a chapel or a Christian bookstore. To paraphrase an article written by my wife on the role of grace in fiction, too often Christians treat art as something that needs to be redeemed, as if remarkable art done well does not justify its own existence. Christians do not need to put clothes on the nude.
The greatest difference between the Christian artist and all others is the audience. Christian art is doxological. It is a means for the Christian to glorify and enjoy God. This says nothing about its actual content. It may serve a liturgical purpose, which I admit is what I love about ancient Christian art. It may be serene, though it does not have to be. Or, it may tell us something about the darkness that exists in the world. But in the end, it must be doxological.
“Forgive Them” Found, Jesus with a “Jewish” Look
May 22nd, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Scary Buddhas, Hitler’s Desk, Israel vs. “Sex”
May 22nd, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Archie Rand’s 613 Canvases Exhibited in Brooklyn Warehouse
May 21st, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Interview: Rev. Ken Yamada
May 21st, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Rev. Ken Yamada is a minister at Berkeley Higashi Honganji Buddhist Temple in Berkeley, Calif. He began with the following caveat: “As a Buddhist minister, I’m not an expert on art, but I do have a personal interest in Buddhist art and I sometimes refer to art as a means to teach Buddhism, which is the whole point of ‘Buddhist art.’ So that is my humble perspective in trying to provide feedback to your questions.”
MW: To what extent, if at all, is creating art a religious experience in Buddhism, as opposed to simply an act of creating works that then take on religious significance?
RKY: Both approaches represent two sides of the same coin. Artists create work meant to take on religious meaning. And the creation of art is also meant to be a religious experience.
For example, an artist skilled in his craft, may carve a statute or paint a picture meant to depict a Buddha or a scene of a story in a sutra, which are then seen by others for their religious meaning.
For those people who see the art only in terms of a beautiful object (such as viewers at a museum), the artwork is not really “Buddhist” in my opinion.
The creation process ideally also is a religious experience. When a carver works on a statue, one form of practice is to perform a simple chant, such as “Nam Am Da Bu” while carving, over and over. This practice cultivates a calm, clear mind of appreciation. Consequently from this mind, a peaceful-looking Buddha emerges from the block of wood. The mind of the carver is just as important as skill in creating a statue of the Buddha.
MW: Is there a such thing as Buddhist art per se? If so, what does it entail? Are there any subjects that are off limits to Buddhist artists?
RKY: Traditionally, Buddhist art are representations of the symbols and images found in the sutras, which are the scriptures based on the historic Buddha’s sermons. For example, they will be different Buddhas, specific symbols such as lotus blossoms (which represents “wisdom”), or devil-like images (which represent anger and ignorance).
However, Buddhism is very liberal in the sense that anything can be a teaching (Dharma) to us. Therefore, nothing is really off limits in terms of what subject or image form the basis of the art, as long as it expresses Truth as taught by the Buddha, such as “interdependence” or “nirvana” or “impermanence,” etc. Sometimes these teachings are deeply buried in the symbolism expressed by the art, so artwork must be studied, analyzed and meditated upon before these truths are realized by the viewer. This process too, of using art to move a person to think about life in a deep and profound way, is another means by which art serves its religious purpose. Mandalas are an obvious example of this process, as they are meant to be stared at and reflected upon continuously.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Rev. Ken Yamada’
“Is It Creepy To Remember Someone Else’s Tragedy?”
May 21st, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
My review of The Memory Thief is in this week’s Jewish Press. Here’s the lede:
There is perhaps a paradox afoot in conventional American Jewish views on Holocaust memory. For the most part, our society ridicules people who allow a movie or an article in a newspaper to completely change their lives, yet we expect our programs on the Holocaust to solicit exactly these responses in people who are either willfully or involuntarily ignorant of World War II. Thus, we demand that people let go of themselves and their preconceived notions enough to internalize the horrifying reality of the Holocaust, but we also ask them to display restraint so that they do not go mad. You are a monster if it does not affect you, we effectively say, but if you let it get to you too much, there is something wrong with you.
Nextbook Podcast: David Benioff, Author of “City of Thieves”
May 20th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
This week’s episode of the Nextbook podcast is called “Partners in Crime” (listen in here). Sara Ivry interviews David Benioff about his new book City of Thieves, which focuses on 1941 Leningrad, bombed by the Nazis. According to the Nextbook site, the book
follows two Russians—a Jewish teenager and a young Soviet soldier—both imprisoned for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. When a high ranking member of Stalin’s secret police summons them to his chamber, they’re issued a challenge: procure a dozen eggs for his daughter’s wedding or face execution. Many trials and tribulations follow.
I thought one of Benioff’s points was really interesting. He has a lot of experience with script writing (Troy and The Kite Runner), and he said he found after having to write a book that there had always been a “lazy shorthand” to script writing. To describe a scene, all he had to do was use a word or two, and it would be up to the designer to interpret the setting. In a book, that job fell solely on his shoulders. I’d never thought about script-writing that way, but I am hardly surprised that Ivry solicited such a revealing discussion; she is an excellent interviewer.
What Should We Make of the Israeli Art Question?
May 19th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
As quoted in the IHT, the curator of the Israel Museum’s “Real Time: Art in Israel, 1998-2008” claims: “We have entered a kind of dream - come - true period, meaning Israeli art has turned very international without losing its Israeli feel.”
I am not sure I agree with Amitai Mendelsohn’s argument. Let’s add some context.
I covered this question in a review for the Forward of the Cooper Hewitt’s show “SOLOS: New Design From Israel” back in January 2006. In it I suggested (and I still feel it to be true that) “To classify art based on geographical origin is to play a silly game of Pin the Tail on the Donkey … The show of 18 artists … successfully argues for locally important design works while failing to outline any Israeli identity therein.” (See also this piece in Arab American News, on Israeli and Palestinian art.)
I also covered the recent show ” Personal Landscapes: Contemporary Art from Israel” at American University’s Katzen Center for the Washington Jewish Week, for which Dalia Levin, director of the Herzliya Museum, told me that Israeli art “cannot really be identified as Jewish art concerned with religious or local politics alone” due to its “multicultural qualities.”
The Israel Museum adds this on its site:
Many of the works in the exhibition convey a fear of impending global catastrophe and a yearning for escape to distant realms, real or imagined. They propose wild primeval settings or realms of fantasy and myth. For the most part, the here and now is absent from these works: those in which immediate local realities are evident either observe life in Israel from a distance, framing the political present in mythical time, or else they reveal dark currents flowing beneath the surface.
Let’s put it all together. Israeli art is very multicultural and addresses all the same issues that artists everywhere represent. Just as debates rage on about whether Israel is or even should be a Jewish state, artists and curators seem reluctant to equate Israeli art with Jewish art. Many Israeli artists I have interviewed tell me they are artists and the Israel component is negligible or even misleading, while others tell me they are very proud of their “Israeliness,” whatever that means.
Clearly, equating Israeli art with Jewish art will not work, because Israeli art will have to incorporate both Christian and Islamic art, as well as secular art. Even if Israel belongs militarily and politically to Jews, its art presumably will have to be more expansive.
It is probably high time to ask ourselves what is really at stake in all this. The notion of finding a solid definition of the word “Israeli” (which seems to be a prerequisite to a definition of “Israeli art”) is quite appealing, especially to me as a religion and arts writer. But the term becomes slippery, as many do in a postmodern world, because it has to fit many different sorts of artists and perspectives.
I hope that exhibits continue to grapple with cultural, religious, and national identities. I find it more interesting when such exhibits fail than the alternative, when exhibits succeed at taking no risks. I just find it troubling when exhibits try to do both. This nonsense about being universal “without losing its Israeli feel” is just rhetoric. Let’s get more sophisticated. Either there is something Israeli about the art — and then just give it to us and we will judge what, if anything, it means — or let us just talk about individual artists without attaching them to a national identity. If the works are any good, they should not need any such help.
Islam in Cartoons, Hallucinatory Hindu Art, 2 Jewish Shows Win AAM Award
May 19th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Interview: Chuck Pettis, Founder, Earth Sanctuary
May 12th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
According to his biography on Earth Sanctuary, Chuck Pettis is a “visionary, designer, eco-artist, and author” and founder and owner of “Earth Sanctuary, a 72-acre nature reserve and meditation parkland on Whidbey Island, Washington.” He is a “dedicated practitioner of Tibetan Buddhism, he deeply believes in the value of meditation,” and is the author, most recently, of Secrets of Sacred Space: Discover and Create Places of Power. Pettis is also the president of the Seattle-based Sakya Monastery. The image is from his site.
MW: What is Sakya Monastery, and how is it different from other Buddhist monasteries?
CP: For people seeking spiritual and personal growth, Sakya Monastery provides access to the Buddha’s teachings and guidance in a community of practitioners. Sakya Monastery provides a place to learn from highly qualified and spiritual Tibetan Lamas in a beautiful traditional setting.
Sakya Monastery provides people the opportunity to learn and practice authentic and traditional Tibetan Buddhist teachings.
MW: When did you first get involved with the monastery?
CP: I became involved with Sakya Monastery in 1995.
MW: To what extent does Sakya promote the arts?
Sakya Monastery does not promote the arts. Artwork in the form of paintings, statues, calligraphy and other media are a fundamental part of Tibetan Buddhist spiritual practices.
MW: What is Earth Sanctuary?
CP: Earth Sanctuary combines exemplary ecology with art and spirit to create a sanctuary for birds and wildlife and a peaceful place for personal renewal and spiritual connection. Earth Sanctuary is open every day of the year, rain or shine, during daylight hours. $7/person fee.
MW: To what extent is your eco-art based on Buddhist principles?
CP: Earth Sanctuary’s eco-art is universal in nature, being based on universal symbols and archetypes. We do have a number of Buddhist-based artworks. For example, we have a number of Tibetan Buddhist prayer flags around the property and also two Tibet-Tech prayer wheels.
MW: More generally, to what extent, if at all, is creating art a religious experience in Buddhism, as opposed to simply an act of creating works that then take on religious significance?
CP: At Sakya Monastery, we just had a workshop to create over 1,000 Tsa Tsa’s. ‘Tsa Tsa’ is a Tibetan term used to describe Buddha statues and relief images that are made as part of a particular meditation practice. Making tsa tsas is a preliminary spiritual practice used to eliminate obstacles, purify negativities, and create positive energy (merit). The tsa tsas were made with clay, that are then dried, and painted. These tsa tsa’s will then be placed inside a stupa to be build at the Tara Meditation Center at Earth Sanctuary, as a Tibetan Buddhist sacred space.
Continue reading ‘Interview: Chuck Pettis, Founder, Earth Sanctuary’
My Interview with Bea Fields on Y-Talk Radio
May 12th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
For those who didn’t have a chance to listen in live, click here to hear my interview with Bea Fields of Y-Talk Radio and Millennial Leaders. Bea is absolutely wonderful, and the interview was a lot of fun. You can subscribe to various feeds and podcasts on her site to hear the rest of her great interviews. Or click on the icon below:
(UPDATE) Evidently the Blog Talk Radio link updates, so to hear my interview you must go through this link.
Interview: Hayan Charara, “‘Arab American,’ for me, is one of many identifications.”
May 9th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
According to the University of Arkansas Press’ site, “Hayan Charara was a visiting professor of poetry writing at the University of Texas at Austin in 2005. Before that he taught in New York City. He is the author of two collections of poetry, The Sadness of Others and The Alchemist’s Diary. Born in Detroit, Michigan, to immigrant parents, he currently lives in Texas. He is also a woodworker.” (Photo: Rawi)
MW: To what extent do you identify as an Arab American? How do you personally define the term? Is there a difference between an American Arab and an Arab American?
HC: “Arab American,” for me, is one of many identifications. I’m sure this is how many others see themselves — as Arab Americans, but also as Lebanese, or Palestinian, or men, women, husbands, wives, engineers, Detroiters, New Yorkers, Christians, Muslims, Jews, and so on.
As for the difference between “American Arab” and “Arab American,” I’m sure there is a distinction here that’s more than semantics, but I’m not aware of how others might be using them.
MW: In your introduction you first show some hesitation to define “Arab American” and to isolate a trend in the poets you gather in the anthology, but then you say that they all share an unapologetic identification with America. How do you reconcile these two points?
HC: My hesitation to define “Arab American” is a hesitation to give it a “once and for all” type of definition. This term means different things to different people. In my own family, we understood it differently. There are, among many of the poets in Inclined to Speak, an “unapologetically American” voices, which is to say that these poets are using an American vernacular, for instance, or are informed by American poetics (many of the poetic influences of the poets are American — not always, but often). These two things are compatible, too — that is a multi-faceted understanding of “Arab American” on the one hand, and the multi-faceted expressions of things American by the poets on the other.
MW: Are poets on the forefront of identity issues? Why or why not?
HC: It’s probably best to ask the poets themselves. I don’t know. Identity is certainly an issue dealt with, and one that readers and critics look to in poetry; but I can’t say for sure just how much of a priority is it for other poets.
“What, if anything, is Arab American poetry?”
May 9th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
My review of “Inclined to Speak: An Anthology of Contemporary Arab American Poetry,” edited by Hayan Charara (University of Arkansas Press, 2008, site here) is in this week’s issue of The Arab American News.
Here’s part of the review:
The 39 poets, whose work is collected in Hayan Charara’s “Inclined to Speak: An Anthology of Contemporary Arab American Poetry,” all bear some relation to the term “Arab American,” though each also resists such a title insofar as it is limiting. If “Inclined” can be said to expose one unifying theme that binds Arab American poets together, it is their resistance to be stereotyped as Arab Americans on the one hand, yet their insistence on Arab and American components to their identity and experiences.
Interview with Hayan to follow…
The World’s Youngest Professional Artist?
May 8th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Image: “Photo: Savi Sawarkar painting– Ambedkarite Monk.” From Vidya Bhushan Rawat’s article.
2 Book Controversies
May 8th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Some say books are doomed to disappear in an era of new media, but one way they can tread water for the time being is by keeping themselves in the news through controversies.
AFP reports on the Turin book fair, which “honours Israel on the 60th anniversary of the Jewish state’s creation.” Tariq Ramadan is criticizing Italian President Giorgio Napolitano’s scheduled appearance on the grounds that it will make the fair “a political and not a cultural event.”
Meanwhile, AP reveals that the most shunned book in libraries is not gory or satanic, or even sexually explicit. Instead, it’s Justin Richardson’s and Peter Parnell’s “And Tango Makes Three” (2005), a tale of a penguin brought up by (gasp!) two dads.
Interview: Walter Michael Miller, editor and publisher, arttattler.com
May 7th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Walter Michael Miller is editor and publisher of arttattler.com, which provides “Commentary and surveillance of more than 800 current and recent art exhibitions around the world, organized geographically with archives of exhibitions from the last year, including architecture and design.” See also the Art Tattler blog here. (The image of Miller is from arttattler.com.)
MW: When and why did you start Art Tattler?
WMM: I started Art Tattler in September 2006, after having left Review, a regional visual art magazine I founded in 1998 in Kansas City, Missouri. I designed, published, and edited it. The name for the first nine months was Pangaeology.
MW: Since its launch, what patterns, if any, have you seen in religious art?
WMM: That would be hard to say, since there are elements of the metaphysical in virtually all art. I’m sure there are artists who would describe themselves as religious, but it could be a majority who describe themselves as ethical humanists, and some who would describe themselves as good businesspersons. It has always been the religious — the metaphysical — that has been the magnet in artwork that has drawn me in — what might not be readily seen in the art.
MW: How frequently would you guess exhibits feature a religious component or content?
WMM: Exhibitions, by and large, do not contain religious components or content. Here we have to make a distinction between modern and contemporary art and historical art. Historical art tends to be rife with obvious religious references because it was created in a time where the church was not only the state, but it was a major collector of art.
MW: Have you found there to be any regional patterns to exhibits of religious art?
WMM: It depends on how overt the religious references are in the art. Even in modern and contemporary Latin American art it is not unusual to see a Sacred Heart or a Virgin of Guadalupe represented, although they have attained the status of vernacular representations.
MW: How often do questions of censorship arise in response to exhibits?
WMM: Censorship rears its ugly head seldom. I fear more the reality of unconscious self-censorship in a xenophobic society and culture.
Chanting Kaddish For Willy Loman
May 7th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
My review of “A View From The Bridge” and “Death Of A salesman” at The Arthur Miller Festival at Arena Stage is in The Jewish Press.
Willy Loman (center), with his two sons Hap (left) and Biff (right) in “Death of a Salesman” at Arena Stage.
Here’s the full statement from Aaron Davidman, artistic director of Traveling Jewish Theatre in San Francisco:
Hi Menachem,
Our production brought out what we considered to be the inherent Jewish identity of the Loman family and of Bernard and Charlie. All the men wore kipot only in the epilogue at the funeral, and it was the only moment of visual Jewish identity. The feel of Willy’s Jewishness came out in his speech and vocal intonation, how he carried himself, the fact the we are a Jewish theatre and that Corey Fischer is so well known as a Jewish actor exploring Jewish material. all these elements made Willy clearly Jewish. similar for Linda. But it was subjective. Some audiences members said the play was SO Jewish it made the play make sense to them. Others didn’t get how it was supposed to be Jewish.
We saw the boys as completely assimilated.As for Miller, I have no idea what he might think.
Hope this helps.
Best,
Aaron
And then in response to my follow-ups:
To my knowledge, ours was the first overtly Jewish production. Oskar Eustis told me he always thought it was Jewish play. Others did as well.
Yes, they all wore kippot, but only at the funeral, and Biff and Hap removed theirs before they began to speak that scene, so it was very brief, as if they had to wear them for the ritual. I also had a live cello on stage.
I think it’s a stretch to say that Bernard and Charley are “practicing Jews.” There is nothing in the text to support that.
We said that they were more connected to their Jewish identity. To the value of learning and school. To more traditionally Jewish values. That knowing who you are gives you a better chance at success in this world. While Willy didn’t know who he was and bought the promise of capitalism and it destroyed him, like it does so many Americans who trade in the riches of their ethnic identity and custom to chase the false promise of the American dream.
Michael Kimmelman on Anti-Semitism, Uganda and Religious Public School Lessons, PBS’ Jewish People Documentary
May 7th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
An Arab and Jewish Gallery in Israel, a Getty Grant for Buddhist Art
May 6th, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
.
Image: “Jane Dillenberger, Berkeley art historian and author of “The Religious Art of Andy Warhol.” Photo by Nicholas Ukrainiec. SF Chronicle.”
Interview on Y-Talk Radio
May 3rd, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
I will be interviewing with Bea Fields, author of Millennial Leaders, on Y-Talk Radio. You can listen in here on Wednesday 5/7/2008 at 11:00 p.m. (though it’s at 7 p.m. DC time, so perhaps it will be live then).
UPDATE: The interview has been moved to Monday 5/12/2008 at 7:00 PM. Link for listening in here.
Michael Klumpp: “I personally think God is fine with art and artists.”
May 2nd, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
Mike Klumpp (see his very informative and gorgeous site here) is both an artist and a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary. He is an actor, comedian, director, poet, author, and martial artist. The photo is from his site.
MW: Did your studies at Dallas TS focus on religion and art? Does the school have much of a focus on that topic?
MK: Dallas TS was almost resistant to art when I was a student. However, they have changed their stance over the years. Now they are promoting a program which has a great deal of concentration on biblical expression through the arts.
MW: To what extent have you found people who study religion in academic or theological settings to be well versed in religious art?
MK: Unfortunately, people who study in these settings are generally poorly in tune with art as either a philosophical or spiritual expression. Most have little or no grasp of the history of art and
literature and how either have been part of religious expression in various cultures.
MW: Do you consider your acting, comedy, poetry, and writing to be religious art per se? What, if anything, are some of the religious themes that arise in your work?
MK: I do not believe in religious art or Christian art. I believe that it is impossible to separate an artist from their world view. Therefore, if an artist is a Christian, Christian themes will emerge within the genre.
There are those who desire to do “religious art” and set out to use a medium as a platform for promoting a point of view. This work is generally more applied arts than fine arts. Therefore, it tends to lack the great energy and impact of more universally profound work.
There are Christo-centric themes in my work which arise due to my immersion in biblical literature. And I have written as applied art for specific audiences including Christians. Much of my work centers on life and death and therefore reflects questions and comments relative to these concepts. ie - life after death, the reality of a Creator.
Continue reading ‘Michael Klumpp: “I personally think God is fine with art and artists.”’
7 Berlin Artists Insist Their Lice is Art
May 2nd, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
What ever happen to quarantine?
Seven young, lice-infected (apparently intentionally), German artists are camping in the Bat Yam Museum in Israel for three weeks in an installation that is supposed to be art.
It seems the “work” is also controversial for its relation to “memories of Nazi propaganda that described Jews as ‘parasite’” (see here). One viewer thanked the artists “for making such a great statement against the fascist rhetoric of German history.”
The work is supposed to grapple with the idea of “hosting,” and one of the performers/artists explained, “The idea is that we live in the museum as their guests, and at the same time we are hosting lice on our heads.”
The only way it seems to me we could further inflate the significance of this piece is by throwing in a reference to the third biblical plague in Egypt (e.g. here).
The 3 Jewish -Bergs, Gay Mohammed Rejected Again
May 1st, 2008 by Menachem Wecker
So apparently, museums are okay with exhibits where the cross is dipped in urine, but showing muhamhead doing things muslims do is wrong and offensive. Of course we all know that only the most insane Christian would retaliate against the ‘Piss Christ’ exhibit with violence. We would much rather wait, and let the imbecile who thinks it’s art, face the wrath of God.